Not really. Most of the money stays in the USA, and no military aid is immediate. The USA first has to replenish its stockpiles, before any surplus is sent to Ukraine. That's $23b. Buying advanced weapons takes time from procurement, manufacturing (if not in stock) to delivering. The Ukrainians need bullets, artillery shells now. Thats's another $14b. Enhancing the capabilities of the Ukranian military and intelligence between Kiev and Washington does not sound like an immediate lethal weapons supply. That's $14b. Pensions, salaries. and keeping the government in Ukraine afloat does not sound like an immediate lethal weapons supply. Thats's $9b.
There is no immediate attached to any portion of this aid, and it does not look that what the Ukrainians desperately need is part of this package. (basis staff).
In the Ukraine bill, of the $60.7bn, a total of about $23bn would be used by the US to replenish its military stockpiles, opening the door to future US military transfers to Ukraine. Another $14bn would go to the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, in which the Pentagon buys advanced new weapon systems for the Ukrainian military directly from US defence contractors.
There is also more than $11bn to fund current US military operations in the region, enhancing the capabilities of the Ukrainian military and fostering intelligence collaboration between Kyiv and Washington, and about $8bn in non-military assistance, such as helping Ukraine’s government continue basic operations, including the payment of salaries and pensions.
